Carleton plans to introduce a motion to dismiss the lawsuit Carleton Lifeline filed against the university over the arrest of some of its members in October 2010.
The university claims that the lawsuit is frivolous and has no legal basis, in a news release.
Ruth Lobo, Lifeline’s president, and four other demonstrators, including a Queen’s University student, were arrested when they tried to put up graphic displays in the Quad protesting abortion.
Lifeline claims the university violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its own human rights policies when it had the pro-life organization’s members arrested on a trespass charge.
Lobo and John McLeod, the two Lifeline members named in the lawsuit, are claiming $225,000 in various damages and want a declaration from the university that it violated its policies, according to their statement of claim before the court.
Carleton claims that it is not bound by the Charter, as it is not a government entity, according to its motion to strike. The university also claims its internal policies are not legally binding and Lifeline cannot stake legal claims against them.
The demonstration at issue was a travelling photo-mural exhibit, as part of the Genocide Awareness Project. The exhibit used images of aborted unborn babies and genocide atrocities, according to Lifeline’s statement of claim.
The university administration declared that the images were too graphic and asked Lifeline to set up the exhibit in Porter Hall instead. Lifeline claimed the alternate venue was too closed off and would not give them enough exposure.
“This is an important case for freedom of expression on campus,” said Albertos Polizogopoulos, counsel for the group. The organization is determined to pursue the case and “will continue to defend their right to freedom of expression vigorously,” according to a press release.
Lobo said Lifeline is continually treated differently from other organizations on campus because their message is controversial. The Genocide Awareness Project aimed to graphically compare abortion to historical atrocities like the Holocaust, according to its website.
The university has refused to give detailed statements to the media and wants to make its position clear in court.
“We are confident in that position and will defend the university vigorously,” said Christopher Cline, a media relations coordinator at Carleton. Carleton’s motion to strike, which was originally scheduled to be heard on June 16, has been adjourned to a court hearing on July 12 because the plaintiffs required more time to prepare their response, according to Polizogopoulos.
The case is being heard by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
